Holding off Mrs Jellyby

It's possible I've got the wrong end of the stick here, not having read the book from which Gary Gutting's discussion takes off - namely, Steven Pinker's The Better Angels of Our Nature - but, taking that discussion cold, so to speak, I have the impression that Gutting conflates two different things: on the one hand, an assumption of moral equality dictating that one should refrain from harming all persons (and, I guess, that the rules of social life should not discriminate unfairly on grounds of status); on the other hand, an assumption that 'morality requires treating everyone equally', such that 'it's wrong to privilege, say, my spouse, children, friends, or neighbors over others'. You what? Gutting's own example is of being faced with the choice between trying to rescue a loved one and trying to rescue someone else from a fire. But you can multiply examples at will. Morality doesn't, or at least it shouldn't, override either special obligations or moderate self-interest. Does a belief in moral equality mean you should take the same care for the welfare of your children as you do for the welfare of other people's? Or be as focused on the health of strangers as you are on your own? Or love your bus driver like you love your sweetheart? Evidently not. Call it a division of labour.